DOCSLIB.ORG

Against Nationalism Anarchist Federation Anarchist Communist Editions

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Against Nationalism Anarchist Federation Anarchist Communist Editions Against Nationalism Anarchist Federation Anarchist Communist Editions. Pamphlet No. 20. September 2009 We are against all national flags. All national flags are against us. Against Nationalism Contents preface ................................................................3 the nation and nationalism..............................6 the origins of nationism....................................9 why do anarchists oppose nationalism ?.......15 the left and the ‘national question’...............18 national liberation struggles...........................20 all nation states are imperialist.......................24 after nationalism...............................................27 appendices.........................................................30 Against Nationalism 3 Preface his pamphlet has its origins in a particular time and place, with the impetus behind Tit coming from the Israeli state’s military campaign in the Gaza strip in late 2008 and early 2009. As the record of atrocities and the death toll mounted, coming to a final stop at around 1,500 dead, large protests took place around the world, with a significant protest movement developing in Britain. This movement took the form of regular street protests in cities, a wave of 28 university occupations around the country and occasional attacks against companies supposedly implicated in the war. There were also, depress- ingly, actions with clear anti-semitic overtones.1 Anarchist Federation members were involved in a range of ways, being present on street demonstrations and involved in a number of occupations. As anarchists, we are opposed to war, militarism and imperialism, and see a powerful movement against these forces as a vital part of internationalism in action and the process of building the confidence neces- sary for a social movement against the state and capitalism. However, we were unimpressed by the way in which support for the ‘Palestinian resist- ance’ – in other words Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Al-Aqsa Martyrs brigade and the other proto-state forces in the region - became mixed in with the legitimate revulsion felt as the bombs and shells fell onto the heads of ordinary Gazans. These groups - which called on ordinary Palestinians to ‘martyr’ themselves for the nation - have a clear history of repressing workers’ struggles at gunpoint, oppressing women, gays and lesbians, and spreading the virulently reactionary doctrines of nationalism and Islamism. As the war ground on, they showed their true colours by attempting to indiscriminately kill Israelis, settling scores with their rivals through summary executions, and making political capital out of refugees by preventing them from accessing medical aid over the border.2 As ordi- nary Palestinians fled in droves, ignoring the calls from militant groups and their Western cheerleaders to throw themselves upon the pyre and join the ‘resistance’, the true face of that ‘resistance’ became apparent. As anarchist communists, we have always opposed nationalism, and have always marked our distance from the left through vocally opposing all nationalism – including that of ‘oppressed nations’. While we oppose oppression, exploitation and dispossession on national grounds, and oppose imperialism and imperialist warfare, we refuse to fall into the trap so common on the left of identifying with the underdog side and glorifying ‘the 1 A Tesco Metro supermarket in Stepney had its windows smashed and the words ‘kill Jews’ were daubed on the wall. 2 Hamas prevented Gazans from reaching a field hospital on the Israeli side of the border at Erez at the end of January. See Dozens believed dead in reprisal attacks as Hamas retakes control, The Guardian, 30/01/09 4 Against Nationalism resistance’ – however ‘critically’ – which is readily observable within Leninist/Trotskyist circles. We took this stance on Northern Ireland in the past, and take it on Israel/Palestine today. Therefore, in order to give context to the text that follows and show our analysis in a practical context, we reproduce as appendices two texts which AF groups circulated as leaflets during the campaign, and which were utilised by other anarchist comrades in the UK, such as locals of the anarcho-syndicalist Solidarity Federation and Organise! in Northern Ireland. We hope that this text will circulate as widely as our original leaflets did, which were translated into Spanish and Polish and reproduced as far away as Central America, and open debate within the wider anti-state communist movement. September 2009 Against Nationalism ‘Anarchists do not see the world in terms of competing national peoples, but in terms of class. We do not see a world of nations in struggle, but of classes in struggle. The nation is a smokescreen, a fantasy which hides the struggle between classes which exists within and across them. Though there are no real nations, there are real classes with their own interests, and these classes must be differentiated. Consequently, there is no single ‘people’ within the ‘nation’, and there is no shared ‘national interest’ which unifies them.’ The nation and nationalism henever we involve ourselves in everyday life, we find ourselves defined in Wnational terms. When we use our passports, when we apply for a job, when we go to hospital or when we claim benefits, we come up against our national status and the possibilities or handicaps that follow. When we travel, turn on the television, open the paper or make conversation, the categorisation of people into one of sev- eral hundred varieties of human being looms in the background, often taking centre stage. We are all assumed to belong to a national group, and even those people who can claim multiple national identities are still assumed to be defined by them. The division of the world’s population into distinct nations and its governance accord- ingly is a given, and seems as straightforward as anything occurring in nature. When we say, for example, that we are British, Polish, Korean or Somalian we feel that we are describing an important part of ourselves and how we relate to the world around us, giving us commonality with some people and setting us apart from others Bureaucracy makes this intuition more solid. Nationality is its most fundamental category – determining what rights and privileges we have access to, whether we are inside or outside the community of citizenship which nationalism presumes, and ul- timately whether we are a valid, ‘legal’, person. When we come across bureaucracy, the various definitions assigned to us by it loom large: gender, nationality and race in particular. These things seem to be as obvious a part of ourselves as eye colour or blood type, and more often than not go unquestioned. But despite appearing a fundamental attribute of ourselves and others, the principle of nationality is also fundamentally problematic. On one level, it defines itself. To a bureaucracy nationality just is. You have the right passport, the right entitlements, or you don’t. However, as with all social questions, we are dealing not with some ‘natural’ aspect of the human condition, but with a form of social organisation which has both an origin and a rationale. So we come up against the question, ‘what is a nation?’ The usual answer steps forward out of common sense: a ‘people’ share a culture, a history, an origin, a community, a set of values, and, usually, a language which make them a nation. People within the nation share a commonality with one another which they lack with foreigners. From this point of view, the world is made up of such nations; it always has been and always will be. But the ideology of nationalism, regardless of which ‘nation’ we are discussing, is a political one, describing the rela- tionship between ‘the people’ and the state. The nation-state is seen as the outgrowth of the national community, its means of conducting its business and the instrument of its collective will and wellbeing; at the very least a one-on-one correspondence between nation and state is seen as the usual, natural and desirable state of affairs, with any international co-operation, business and organisation progressing from this Against Nationalism 7 starting point . This rhetoric is assumed even in states which do not bother to claim legitimacy through representative democracy. But when we attempt to uncover the qualities which make some collectivities of people a nation and others not, we encounter problems. When we attempt to ar- ticulate what ‘Britishness’, ‘Gambianess’ or ‘Thainess’ might be about, we are in trouble. Nationalist partisans will offer suggestions, but these are always fashionable banalities, whether they are ‘honour’, ‘loyalty’, ‘liberty’, ‘fairness’, or whatever else is current. A handful of iconic national institutions will be pointed to, and a great many more ignored. Nationalisms on this level are unlike political ideologies, there is no definite model for the organisation of society, and there is no unity of principle or program; the unity assumed is an arbitrary one. There are no observable rules to clearly define what makes a national ‘people’, as opposed to other forms of commonality. The usual prerequisites are a shared language and culture. But this shared, culture is difficult to define, and we often find as much cultural variation across populations within nations as between them. Two Han Chinese are assumed to share a commonality as ‘Chinese’ and a natural solidar- ity on this basis even if they speak mutually incomprehensible ‘dialects’. Likewise, understanding continuity between the historical ‘national culture’ and what actually exists requires some dubious reasoning – for example, how is someone in Athens who speaks modern, Attic-derived official Greek expressing the same culture which built the Acropolis, (itself a Greek culture which lacked a Greek nation)? This ‘na- tion’ must often include many who do not meet its supposedly defining attributes; regional, linguistic, cultural, religious and sometimes ‘national’ minorities. This fact that nation-states often exhibit as much variation within their geographic bounds as across them is obvious in many postcolonial African states or in Indonesia for instance, and even in less exotic locales such as Switzerland.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Marxism, Stalinism, and the Juche Speech of 1955: on the Theoretical De-Stalinization of North Korea
    Marxism, Stalinism, and the Juche Speech of 1955: On the Theoretical De-Stalinization of North Korea Alzo David-West This essay responds to the argument of Brian Myers that late North Korean leader Kim Il Sung’s Juche speech of 1955 is not nationalist (or Stalinist) in any meaningful sense of the term. The author examines the literary formalist method of interpretation that leads Myers to that conclusion, considers the pro- grammatic differences of orthodox Marxism and its development as “Marx- ism-Leninism” under Stalinism, and explains that the North Korean Juche speech is not only nationalist, but also grounded in the Stalinist political tradi- tion inaugurated in the Soviet Union in 1924. Keywords: Juche, Nationalism, North Korean Stalinism, Soviet Stalinism, Socialism in One Country Introduction Brian Myers, a specialist in North Korean literature and advocate of the view that North Korea is not a Stalinist state, has advanced the argument in his Acta Koreana essay, “The Watershed that Wasn’t” (2006), that late North Korean leader Kim Il Sung’s Juche speech of 1955, a landmark document of North Korean Stalinism authored two years after the Korean War, “is not nationalist in any meaningful sense of the term” (Myers 2006:89). That proposition has far- reaching historical and theoretical implications. North Korean studies scholars such as Charles K. Armstrong, Adrian Buzo, Seong-Chang Cheong, Andrei N. Lankov, Chong-Sik Lee, and Bala、zs Szalontai have explained that North Korea adhered to the tactically unreformed and unreconstructed model of nationalist The Review of Korean Studies Volume 10 Number 3 (September 2007) : 127-152 © 2007 by the Academy of Korean Studies.
    [Show full text]
  • Nationalism, Internationalism and Chinese Foreign Policy CHEN ZHIMIN*
    Journal of Contemporary China (2005), 14(42), February, 35–53 Nationalism, Internationalism and Chinese Foreign Policy CHEN ZHIMIN* This article examines the role of nationalism in shaping Chinese foreign policy in the history of contemporary China over the last 100 years. Nationalism is used here as an analytical term, rather than in the usual popular pejorative sense. By tracing the various expressions of contemporary Chinese nationalism, this article argues that nationalism is one of the key enduring driving forces which have shaped Chinese foreign policy over the period; as China increasingly integrates herself into this globalized and interdependent world and Chinese confidence grows, the current expression of Chinese nationalism is taking a more positive form, which incorporates an expanding component of internationalism. In recent years, nationalism has been one of the key focuses in the study of China’s foreign policy. In the 1990s, several Chinese writers started to invoke the concept of nationalism, both in their study of Chinese foreign policy and in their prescriptions for the Chinese foreign policy. Likewise, in English-language scholarship the study of Chinese nationalism largely sets the parameters of the debate about the future of Chinese foreign policy and the world’s response to a rising China. An overarching theme of this Western discourse is a gloomy concern with the worrisome nature of recent expressions of Chinese nationalism. Samuel P. Huntington was famously concerned about China’s intention ‘to bring to an end the
    [Show full text]
  • Varieties of American Popular Nationalism.” American Sociological Review 81(5):949-980
    Bonikowski, Bart, and Paul DiMaggio. 2016. “Varieties of American Popular Nationalism.” American Sociological Review 81(5):949-980. Publisher’s version: http://asr.sagepub.com/content/81/5/949 Varieties of American Popular Nationalism Bart Bonikowski Harvard University Paul DiMaggio New York University Abstract Despite the relevance of nationalism for politics and intergroup relations, sociologists have devoted surprisingly little attention to the phenomenon in the United States, and historians and political psychologists who do study the United States have limited their focus to specific forms of nationalist sentiment: ethnocultural or civic nationalism, patriotism, or national pride. This article innovates, first, by examining an unusually broad set of measures (from the 2004 GSS) tapping national identification, ethnocultural and civic criteria for national membership, domain- specific national pride, and invidious comparisons to other nations, thus providing a fuller depiction of Americans’ national self-understanding. Second, we use latent class analysis to explore heterogeneity, partitioning the sample into classes characterized by distinctive patterns of attitudes. Conventional distinctions between ethnocultural and civic nationalism describe just about half of the U.S. population and do not account for the unexpectedly low levels of national pride found among respondents who hold restrictive definitions of American nationhood. A subset of primarily younger and well-educated Americans lacks any strong form of patriotic sentiment; a larger class, primarily older and less well educated, embraces every form of nationalist sentiment. Controlling for sociodemographic characteristics and partisan identification, these classes vary significantly in attitudes toward ethnic minorities, immigration, and national sovereignty. Finally, using comparable data from 1996 and 2012, we find structural continuity and distributional change in national sentiments over a period marked by terrorist attacks, war, economic crisis, and political contention.
    [Show full text]
  • I Know It's Not Racism, but What Is It?
    Cleveland State University EngagedScholarship@CSU Law Faculty Articles and Essays Faculty Scholarship 1-1986 I Know It's Not Racism, But What Is It? Michael H. Davis Cleveland-Marshall College of Law, Cleveland State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/fac_articles Part of the Religion Law Commons How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! Repository Citation Davis, Michael H., "I Know It's Not Racism, But What Is It?" (1986). Law Faculty Articles and Essays. 758. https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/fac_articles/758 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at EngagedScholarship@CSU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Law Faculty Articles and Essays by an authorized administrator of EngagedScholarship@CSU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. I Know It's Not Racism, But. What Is It? by MICHAEL H. DAVIS y memories are so dim, I don't know whether as she stared at his face "we're n ot moving. Why M what I remember is the event itself or the fre­ would we move? We've o~ly been here a short time." quent amused retelling of it by my mother. But on "But, Mrs. Davis," he asked my mother, "haven't May 14, 1948, when I was two years old, the mailman you heard the news?" came to my family's door in our small Massachusetts Wordless, .her frown only grew. town in which we were the only Jews. "The Jews," he announced.
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond Electoralism: Reflections on Anarchy, Populism, and the Crisis of Electoral Politics
    This is a repository copy of Beyond electoralism: reflections on anarchy, populism, and the crisis of electoral politics. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/124741/ Version: Published Version Article: Araujo, E., Ferretti, F., Ince, A. et al. (5 more authors) (2017) Beyond electoralism: reflections on anarchy, populism, and the crisis of electoral politics. ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies, 16 (4). pp. 607-642. ISSN 1492-9732 Reuse This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND) licence. This licence only allows you to download this work and share it with others as long as you credit the authors, but you can’t change the article in any way or use it commercially. More information and the full terms of the licence here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ Beyond Electoralism: Reflections on anarchy, populism, and the crisis of electoral politics A Collective of Anarchist Geographers Erin Araujo, Memorial University of Newfoundland Federico Ferretti, University College Dublin Anthony Ince, Cardiff University Kelvin Mason, para-academic Joshua Mullenite, Florida International University Jenny Pickerill, University of Leicester Toby Rollo, University of British Columbia Richard J White, Sheffield Hallam University [email protected] Abstract This paper is comprised of a series of short, conversational or polemical interventions reflecting on the political ‘moment’ that has emerged in the wake of the rise of right-populist politics, particularly in the Global North.
    [Show full text]
  • Nationalism and Authoritarianism: Genealogies and Morphologies
    Nationalism and Authoritarianism: Genealogies and Morphologies Proposed Joint Doctoral Fellowships (funded by the Intellectual Themes Initiative) The rise of authoritarian and populist politics in the last decade has called for new theoretical and methodological approaches in the study of nationalism. In the past, social science literature on authoritarian politics had been compartmentalized along disciplinary as well as regional lines. Scholarship in the field had been marked by the absence of crossdisciplinary and crossregional dialogue. History and political science approaches were often regarded as separate fields of study which significantly limited the comparative analysis of authoritarianism and nationalism. These proposed joint doctoral fellowships are intended to bring together students and faculty researching nationalism from different methodological perspectives, with a particular focus on the complex and ramified relationship between authoritarianism and nationalism. The main objective of the interdepartmental cooperation is to integrate different disciplinary approaches in order to facilitate the comparative, global and interdisciplinary study of authoritarian and populist variations of nationalist politics. The study plan is designed to help students to inventively combine conceptual and methodological tools to generate genuinely new insights into the genealogies and morphologies of authoritarian and nationalist politics through cutting-edge comparative research. Nationalism Studies is an inherently interdisciplinary field, combining a variety of approaches in order to probe specific questions from different, often complementary, angles. At the master’s level, the Nationalism Studies Program mediates between many disciplines, including History and Political Science, and these proposed joint doctoral fellowships aim to reinforce this mediating role at the doctoral level, enabling students to explore the role of nationalism in framing, constituting, and bolstering authoritarian political systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Two Types of Nationalism in Europe?
    Russian and Euro-Asian Bulletin Vol.7 No.12 December 1997 Published by the Contemporary Europe Research Centre University of Melbourne Two Types of Nationalism in Europe? Stefan Auer Dec 1997 While intellectuals and some politicians in a radical change in the relationship between the West have seen Europe approaching the polity and culture, and that this in turn pro- ‘postmodern’ age, in which the conception duced nationalism. The salient feature of the of a national state would become outdated preceding agrarian societies was, according and would be replaced by a new multina- to Gellner, cultural diversity and fragmenta- tional and multicultural entity, the ‘back- tion in small autonomous sub-communities, ward’ neighbours in the East have been said each of which lived in its own specific id- to be prone to succumb to a resurgence of iom. A peasant had no need to communicate nationalism. Thus, analysts like Schöpflin1 with the elite of high culture who existed saw confirmed the old concept2 of two es- beyond his/her experience (which was usu- sentially different forms of nationalism: the ally limited to the size of his/her valley). The enlightened Western, that is supportive of modern industrial and predominantly urban democracy, and the backward Eastern, that society required mass literacy and a high de- is an obstacle to any genuinely democratic gree of social mobility, which could only be society. The differences are, however, not achieved by nearly universal access to a well described by this reference to geogra- state-sponsored ‘national’ educational sys- phy. Rather, two (or more) different concep- tem.
    [Show full text]
  • Research on American Nationalism: Review of the Literature, Annotated Bibliography, and Directory of Publicly Available Data Sets
    Research on American Nationalism: Review of the Literature, Annotated Bibliography, and Directory of Publicly Available Data Sets Bart Bonikowski Princeton University May 1, 2008 With a Preface by Paul DiMaggio Financial support from the Russell Sage Foundation, and helpful advice in identifying the relevant scholarly literature from Rogers Brubaker, Andrew Perrin, Wendy Rahn, Paul Starr, and Bob Wuthnow, are gratefully acknowledged. Preface Bart Bonikowski has produced an invaluable resource for scholars and students interested in American nationalism. His essay reviewing the literature in the field, the annotated bibliography that follows, and the inventory of data sets useful for the study of American nationalism constitute a sort of starter kit for anyone interested in exploring this field. As Mr. Bonikowski points out, relatively few scholars have addressed “American nationalism” explicitly. Much research on nationalism takes as its object movements based on a fiction of consanguinity, and even work that focuses on “civic” or “creedal” nationalism has often treated the United States as a marginal case. Indeed, part of the U.S.’s civic nationalist creed is to deny that there is such a thing as “American national- ism.” Americans, so the story goes, are patriotic; nationalism is foreign and exotic, something for Europe or the global South. The reality, of course, is not so simple. Both historical and social-scientific re- search demonstrates a strong tradition of ethnocultural nationalism in the U.S., providing evidence that Americans of other than European descent have often been perceived as less fully “American” than white Christians of northern European origin. Moreover, nat- ionalism need not be defined solely in ethnocultural terms.
    [Show full text]
  • Nationalism in Europe
    Nationalism Do Now Explain your pride in your country? What would you do for your nation? Why? Learning Targets and Intentions of the Lesson 1. KNOW how Nationalism and Liberalism dominated the political landscape of the 19th Century. 2. UNDERSTAND and explain the contrasts between Realism and Romanticism. 3. Complete a guided reading and short response assignment on the significance of Nationalism (SKILLS). What is Liberalism? A political philosophy founded on the ideas of liberty and equality. Nineteenth-century liberalism was more than an economic and political theory: it was a way of viewing the world. Foundations of Liberalism are in Enlightenment ideas, English liberties, the principles of the Declaration of the Rights of Man Nationalism A nation – people joined together by the bonds of: common language, common customs, culture, and history, administered by the same government. Political and ethnic boundaries should coincide. What is Nationalism? Culture – History - shared way a common of life past Nationality – shared Language- shared ethnic Nationalism communication ancestry Religion- Territory shared by – land belongs to most group Positives –overthrow absolute rule, democratic governments Negatives – Forced assimilation of minority, extreme nationalism leads to dictatorship How did “nationalism” affect Europe in the 19th-century? Following the defeat of Napoleon, the Congress of Vienna met to create a peace settlement in Europe Battle of Waterloo The Congress’s purpose was to establish a balance of power in Europe and return monarchs to power. Prince Klemens von Metternich Congress of Vienna (1814 – 1815) But, the French Revolution had inspired the rise of nationalistic movements in many European countries. Nationalism is the loyalty of a people to their values, traditions, geography…their Country Nationalistic Movements: The unification of Germany was led by Otto von Bismarck.
    [Show full text]
  • The Case for Left Wing Nationalism
    Vol. 5 No. 1 Spring 2014 The Case for Left Wing Nationalism By Stephen Maxwell Luath Press, 2013 ISBN 9781908373878 £9.99 The educator, according to Paulo Freire, cannot claim neutrality – to do so is both deceitful and to side with the oppressor. Personally, I am partisan about the progressive socialist possibilities presented by the forthcoming Referendum on Scottish Independence. I feel Stephen Maxwell’s posthumous collection of political and cultural essays is a necessary, valuable and exciting contribution to the current debate. Maxwell is, I think, determinedly radical in attempting to create a rupture that might ensure the break-up of the archaic, imperialist British State. Not only does his book display Gramscian analytical insight, it is also a manifesto, and indeed a curriculum, to base a popular educational dialogue around a vision for a new Scotland. I believe it provides the missing key for the strategic journey the left has been trying to navigate since 1979. It is difficult to conceive of anything more potentially revolutionary - certainly in my lifetime! Maxwell’s important book recognises that the contemporary political debate is obfuscated by a ‘nationalist’ discourse. In his review of Tom Nairn’s ‘vigorous and passionate’ The Break-up of Britain (1981), Maxwell emphasises the significance of Nairn’s analysis which explains nationalism as a response to the unequal development of capitalism in its industrial phase. Nationalist ideologies, Maxwell contends, are based in part on ‘myth’, especially in the Scottish context. Moreover, nationalism is, in Nairn’s phrase, ‘Janus faced’. Leftist concerns about the contradictory, ‘two edged sword’ nature of nationalism and, indeed, of promoting nationalism/national popular strategies to overcome British imperialism in the past, are obviously well founded.
    [Show full text]
  • "The National Question" Reconsidered
    From an Ecological Perspective: "The National Question" Reconsidered Jeremy Brecher NINETEEN-EIGHTY-SIX MARK ED THE HUNDREDTH ANNIVERSARY of a general strike throughout the United States for the eight hour day, best remembered today for the trial and judicial murder of the Haymarket Martyrs. That event came to be commemorated in the world-wide holiday May Day celebrating the international solidarity of labor. One hundred years later, May Day was barely acknowledged in North America, while in Moscow's Red Square tanks paraded and jet fighters screamed overhead. Similar celebrations occurred in the Soviet-dominated countries of Eastern Europe and in the anti-Soviet and mutually hostile Communist countries of Asia. The festival of international solidarity has been transformed into a celebration of national power. Yet the insubstantiality of national boundaries was well demonstrated on last year's May Day , not by workers of all lands joining in The Internationale, but by a cloud of radioactive dust circling the globe, carrying the message "Chernobyl is everywhere." It is in this context that I want to reconsider what radicals once called " the national question. " The problems of nationality, nationalism, and the nation state have proved over the past century to be the greatest stumbling blocks to the aspirations for a better world expressed in socialist, anarchist, communist, and related radical movements. Class has not so far proved to be a unifying bond which overcomes the conflicts among different peoples. Nor has the liberation of one people from oppression by another ensured pro-social behavior op the part of the formerly oppressed once in power.
    [Show full text]
  • Internationalism and Nationalism
    1952 Speeches/Documents Title: Internationalism and Nationalism Author: Liu Shaoqi Date: Source:. Foreign Languages Press, 1952 Description:. written in 1948, published in 1952 Introduction The revolution concerning the Communist Party of Yugoslavia adopted by the Information Bureau of the Communist Workers' Parties of Bulgaria, Rumania, Hungary, Poland the U.S.S.R., France, Czechoslovakia and Italy condemned the anti-Soviet position of the Tito clique - renegades of the proletariat. The resolution pointed out that this anti-Soviet position of the Tito clique proceeds from the nationalistic programme of the bourgeoisie and is leading to a betrayal of the cause of international unity of the working people and to a nationalist position. The resolution stated: “Such a nationalist position can only lead to Yugoslavia's denegation into an ordinary bourgeois republic, to the loss of its independence and to its transformation into a colony of the imperialist countries.” The resolution of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China on the Yugoslav Party also pointed out that the Tito clique, because of its betrayal of a series of fundamental viewpoints of Marxism -Leninism, had fallen into the mire of bourgeois nationalism and bourgeois parties.. At the same time, our Central Committee pointed out that by passing this resolution, the Information Bureau was “fulfilling its obligations to the cause of preserving world peace and democracy, and of defending the people of Yugoslavia from the deception and aggression of American imperialism.” What, then, is bourgeois nationalism? What is the relation between Marxism-Leninism and the national question? Why is it that the anti-Soviet position of the Tito clique will make Yugoslavia a prey to the deception and aggression of American imperialism, and forfeit her independence, thereby transforming her into a colony of imperialism? The purpose of this article is to answer these questions.
    [Show full text]